Ford's (Bosnian Serb) autosomal results

[Leto]

Yeah my sis is skinny with big boobs like a typical Baltic and I’m Black

You do look Jamaican, bruh.

[Leto]

Such is the case with me and my brother. I'm pretty dark while he's super light, looks like an Austrian or something.

Dark in terms of hair and eye color? I doubt you are dark-skinned in winter.

[Ford]

Dark in terms of hair and eye color? I doubt you are dark-skinned in winter.

Yes, basically, although I don't tan that well so I have pretty much the same tone all year round.

[ixulescu]

Romanians originated from Western balkans and hungarians from Volga. Modern Romania was home of bulgarians:

Transylvania, Wallachia, Moldova was bulgarian slavic:

Not this shit again. Romanians didn't migrate from anywhere.

Yes, First Bulgarian empire dominated the lands North of Danube, including the territory of today's Transylvania.
However, Bulgarians didn't live there, their presence was solely military. The population of Transylvania in 10th century comprised of Vlachs and West and South Slavs, some settled, some still migrating, but no Bulgarians. The only places where compact historic populations of Bulgarians lived in past or present Romanian lands are Northern Dobrogea and Bugeac.

[Blondie]

Not this shit again. Romanians didn't migrate from anywhere.

Yes, First Bulgarian empire dominated the lands North of Danube, including the territory of today's Transylvania.
However, Bulgarians didn't live there, their presence was solely military. The population of Transylvania in 10th century comprised of Vlachs and West and South Slavs, some settled, some still migrating, but no Bulgarians. The only places where compact historic populations of Bulgarians lived in past or present Romanian lands are Northern Dobrogea and Bugeac.

You are wrong, because romanians have latin origin and the latin language is not native in this area. Romanians are descedants of the romanized west balkanite population (vlachs).

Procopius greek historian wrote:

"The River Ister (Danube) flows down from the mountains in the country of the Celts, who are now called Gauls; and it passes through a great extent of country which for the most part is altogether barren, though in some places it is inhabited by barbarians who live a kind of brutish life and have no dealings with other men. When it gets close to Dacia, for the first time it clearly forms the boundary between the barbarians, who hold its left bank, and the territory of the Romans, which is on the right."
Peri Ktismaton (Buildings), Book IV, 9-10.

There was no latin speaker population in the lands on other side of the Danube namely, in Dacia.

Jordanes wrote:

""I mean ancient Dacia, which the race of the Gepids now possess. This Gothia, which our ancestors called Dacia and now, as I have said, is called Gepidia, was then bounded on the east by the Roxolani, on the west by the Yazyg, on the north by the Sarmatians and Basternae and on the south by the river Danube. The Yazyg are separated from the Roxolani by the Aluta river only."
Getica, XII, 73-74.

The old chronicles didn't mentioned any survivor dacian or latin population in the modern Romania.

[ixulescu]

You are wrong, because romanians have latin origin and the latin language is not native in this area. Romanians are descedants of the romanized west balkanite population (vlachs).

[unrelated quotes]

The old chronicles didn't mentioned any survivor dacian or latin population in the modern Romania.

That's absolute nonsense. Roman cities in Dacia were inhabited and had a Roman life until 7th century, when they were (mysteriously) abandoned. These cities show traces of all major events that happened in the Roman empire, including the persecution of Christians and finally the adoption of Christianity as a state religion.

These cities were not affected by Huns and Gepids. They probably payed tribute, or who knows what happened. By 7th century all of these cities were abandoned, in a period that coincides with the establishment of the Avar Khaganate in this area.

Latin speakers were very much alive and well on the territory of Romania between 2nd and 7th century. Then there is a period of merging cultures, in which the Vlach element remains dominant, probably because Vlachs were numerically superior in the area, especially in the highlands:

[Blondie]

That's absolute nonsense. Roman cities in Dacia were inhabited and had a Roman life until 7th century, when they were (mysteriously) abandoned. These cities show traces of all major events that happened in the Roman empire, including the persecution of Christians and finally the adoption of Christianity as a state religion.

These cities were not affected by Huns and Gepids. They probably payed tribute, or who knows what happened. By 7th century all of these cities were abandoned, in a period that coincides with the establishment of the Avar Khaganate in this area.

Latin speakers were very much alive and well on the territory of Romania between 2nd and 7th century. Then there is a period of merging cultures, in which the Vlach element remains dominant, probably because Vlachs were numerically superior in the area, especially in the highlands:

You edited it in Paint?

There were no latin speakers in Dacia in this time, every old chronicler refute that.

Procopius greek historian wrote:
"The River Ister (Danube) flows down from the mountains in the country of the Celts, who are now called Gauls; and it passes through a great extent of country which for the most part is altogether barren, though in some places it is inhabited by barbarians who live a kind of brutish life and have no dealings with other men. When it gets close to Dacia, for the first time it clearly forms the boundary between the barbarians, who hold its left bank, and the territory of the Romans, which is on the right."

Jordanes:
"I mean ancient Dacia, which the race of the Gepids now possess. This Gothia, which our ancestors called Dacia and now, as I have said, is called Gepidia, was then bounded on the east by the Roxolani, on the west by the Yazyg, on the north by the Sarmatians and Basternae and on the south by the river Danube. The Yazyg are separated from the Roxolani by the Aluta river only."
Getica, XII, 73-74.

But sorry i know the romanian natinalists know better than Jordanes and Procopius

[ixulescu]

You edited it in Paint?

There were no latin speakers in Dacia in this time, every old chronicler refute that.

Procopius greek historian wrote:
"The River Ister (Danube) flows down from the mountains in the country of the Celts, who are now called Gauls; and it passes through a great extent of country which for the most part is altogether barren, though in some places it is inhabited by barbarians who live a kind of brutish life and have no dealings with other men. When it gets close to Dacia, for the first time it clearly forms the boundary between the barbarians, who hold its left bank, and the territory of the Romans, which is on the right."

Jordanes:
"I mean ancient Dacia, which the race of the Gepids now possess. This Gothia, which our ancestors called Dacia and now, as I have said, is called Gepidia, was then bounded on the east by the Roxolani, on the west by the Yazyg, on the north by the Sarmatians and Basternae and on the south by the river Danube. The Yazyg are separated from the Roxolani by the Aluta river only."
Getica, XII, 73-74.

But sorry i know the romanian natinalists know better than Jordanes and Procopius

Neither historians explicitly state that there weren't Latin speakers living North of Danube, but that doesn't matter anyway because we have actual archaeological evidence of Latinophones' presence.

How come we have Christian churches in Romania, built between 4th to 6th centuries? - 35 churches unearthed so far.

Were Celts, Goths, Gepids or whatever, building churches at that time? do you think they were Christian in the 4th century? are you that stupid?

[Blondie]

That's absolute nonsense.

"Roman cities in Dacia were inhabited and had a Roman life until 7th century"

Proof?

"These cities were not affected by Huns and Gepids. "

Proof?

"Latin speakers were very much alive and well on the territory of Romania between 2nd and 7th century. "

All old sources deny it.

"because Vlachs were numerically superior in the area"

There were no vlachs in this area. Just ostrogoths:



Huns:



Visigoths:



Bulgars:

[Blondie]

Neither actually traveled to see the cities North of Danube, so your point is moot because we have the actual archaeological evidence of Latinophones presence.
If the Romans would have left in 200s AD, then we wouldn't have Christian churches in Romania, built between 4th to 6th centuries, but we do - 35 churches unearthed so far.

Were Celts, Goths, Gepids or whatever building churches at that time? do you think they were Christian in the 4th century? are you that stupid?

Not just latins were christians lol but germanic tribes (goths, gepids) and partly huns too:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2303783...n_tab_contents